MORE NEWS, 12-8: INSIDER'S GUIDE TO THE CLIMATE TALKS; WHAT THE WORLD IS SAYING; SCOREBOARD TRACKS NEW ENERGY INVESTMENT; THE DANGER OF EMISSIONS

INSIDER'S GUIDE TO THE CLIMATE TALKS
Climate change talks: What to look for at Copenhagen; The Copenhagen climate change talks kicked off on Monday. A Q&A on the key areas that will define success or failure.
Peter Spotts, December 7, 2009 (Christian Science Monitor)

"…What might success in Copenhagen look like? …Three areas will be the keys to "success" in Copenhagen…[1] Emissions reductions…[for] wealthy countries and major developing countries like China, India and Brazil…[for] 2050…[and] 2020…[2]
Immediate action… after the meeting to reduce emissions, move new green technologies into the marketplace, and help developing countries adopt cleaner power…[and, 3] Money. How much…[will wealthy nations offer] to help poorer ones pay for green technologies they will need to spur economic growth in a climate-friendly way?…[P]rogress on those three objectives…[will be success]…[Failure will be] if it ends without a clear mandate to wrap up binding legal language on reducing emissions no later than December 2010…[because] the process is likely to unravel into prolonged haggling…

"Money also looms large. Many in the developing world say their richer counterparts need to pay to help them adjust to a changing climate and to reducing their own emissions. A clear, quick-start financing package for these poorer nations might offset developing country anger over what they view as limited emissions reductions promises by major industrial nations…Industrial countries want a transparent way to verify that developing countries are following through…[but some] developing countries say such oversight [threatens their] national sovereignty."

www.know-the-number.com

Our Climate is Changing!

Please download Flash Player.

"What are countries offering on greenhouse-gas reductions? …South Africa said it would slow the growth of its emissions to 34 percent below the current annual growth rate by 2020 and to 42 percent by 2025, as long as international aid is forthcoming…India has offered to improve its energy efficiency to 20 or 25 percent better than 2005 levels, provided it gets international money…China has offered up a 40 to 45 percent efficiency improvement on 2005. Brazil has put up actual emissions reductions of 36 to 39 percent below 1994 levels by 2020, if it gets financial help…Mexico has promised actions through 2012 that put it on track to reduce emissions by 50 percent by 2050…contingent on international aid.

"What is the combined effect of those emissions offers?…[Holding] warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over preindustrial levels…[by] developed countries [cutting] their greenhouse-gas emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020 and by 80-95 percent by 2050. Developed countries must substantially reduce the growth rate in their emissions…But current promises on emissions reductions fall well short…Rich-countries have currently offered an 8 to 14 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2020…Russia's numbers are…[so far below] the old Soviet Union…emissions could rise…and still meet the country's 2020 target…China's [and India’s targets are] widely seen as…falling into a business-as-usual category…"

click to enlarge

"What are the likely sticking points? …[Developing] countries whose populations are likely to suffer from the effects of climate change…[say] rich country targets are not ambitious enough…[and want] both short-term aid and long term aid…for adaptation efforts, the purchase of green technologies, and…[to] build in-house technical expertise…$10 billion a year over the next three years…[and] $100 billion a year through 2020…[For] that much money, [developed nations] want verification [of reducing emissions]…

"How much impact might 'Climategate' have?…Republican members of Congress are asking the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to forestall any effort to regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act until a full, transparent investigation has taken place…Internationally, the Saudi Arabian's are using the hacked letters from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit to argue that there's no need for any new climate treaty…The UN negotiating process requires unanimous consent…So the Saudis alone could hold things up. But the Saudis often threaten to block movement as a negotiating position…[and really want the agreement to] contain payments to Saudi Arabia to make up for oil revenues it would lose as the world weans itself from oil."


WHAT THE WORLD IS SAYING
European media on climate summit
December 7, 2009 (BBC News)

[From an editorial reprinted in 56 newspapers and 20 languages:] “The politicians in Copenhagen have the power to shape history's judgment on this generation: one that saw a challenge and rose to it, or one so stupid that we saw calamity coming but did nothing to avert it. We implore them to make the right choice.”

[From The UK:] “…Success will also require enough money on the table — perhaps as much as $100 billion a year by 2030 — to allow China and India to make good on the welcome offers of emissions reductions that they have already made…Copenhagen needs to provide a deal that permits the developing world its ascent to prosperity. The main risk to success is that the developing world rejects the deal or that the mutual suspicion between the United States and China on the verification procedures scuppers the plan…Copenhagen could be a signal that there is good money in clean technology. It can help to make the market…Because, in the end, it is by doing things differently rather than by doing fewer things that we will reverse the trajectory of climate change…A credible deal with India and China just might.”

click to enlarge

[From Spain:] “The challenge is huge and the willingness scant. Environmental deterioration cannot be halted by a few measures, either by promising more windmills or by trading emissions. It requires a transformation of the economic model which nobody feels like or is in any hurry for…If they did not do it with the crisis - nor of course have they even been moved by the abject poverty and hunger this model causes - how could an imprecise and distant threat like that of the climate achieve it?”

[From France:] “In Copenhagen, Obama and his like have a mission statement of biblical simplicity: if their countries fail to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by half by 2050 compared to the 1990 figure, the point of no return will have been reached...The disaster scenario, with the melting of the arctic ice at a rate never seen before and glaciers feeding into the great rivers, an increase in sea levels and floods followed by great droughts generating world hunger…The repercussions of such a cataclysm are known: hundreds of millions of climate refugees and the prospect of a proliferation of 'water' wars…Copenhagen is not the emergency. It has already come to pass and it is more than time to move on from words to deeds.”

click to enlarge

[From Germany:] “A global climate protection agreement poses a huge threat to economic interests. That is why agreement in Copenhagen is not certain...Failure in Copenhagen would be a big setback, but future conferences could make up for that. So it will only be clear in a few years' time whether or not strict global climate rules will apply. If no long-term agreement has been reached by then, we would indeed have reason to despair."

[From Russia:] “Last week the front pages of the world's leading newspapers were devoted to the issue which in Russia is still considered to be more of a fad among the slightly eccentric Greens than something that serious people should be concerned about: the international summit on climate change that is opening in Copenhagen today...The heads of 98 states are planning to come to Copenhagen... However, the leaders of the Russian state have ignored the summit... The top Russian officials' disdain for environmental issues reflects the attitude that prevails in our society…Russians do not worry about global warming... To all appearances, Russia is still not part of the international community, as if we live on a different planet.”


SCOREBOARD TRACKS NEW ENERGY INVESTMENT
New Global Climate Prosperity Scoreboard finds over $1 Trillion invested in green since 2007
December 4, 2009 (Ethical Markets)

"Ethical Markets Media (USA and Brazil) and The Climate Prosperity Alliance today launched their Global Climate Prosperity Scoreboard® which tracks private investment in companies growing the green economy globally. This new, never before reported number, showing $1,248,740,645,993.00 (over $1.248 trillion) in total investment since 2007, indicates how investors and entrepreneurs are leading governments in promoting sustainable growth. The scoreboard totals investments in solar, wind, geothermal, ocean/hydro, energy efficiency and storage, and agriculture…[and] purposefully omitted nuclear, “clean coal,” carbon capture and sequestration, and biofuels. We indicate which investments have been publicly announced and committed by major companies for 2010 and beyond…"

[Dr. Marc A. Weiss, Chairman/CEO, Global Urban Development and Chair, Climate Prosperity Alliance:] “This $1.248 trillion of investments are not only from North America and Europe, but also from China, India, Brazil and other developing countries. They indicate that the private sector currently is ahead of governments in understanding that during the 21st century, people, places, and organizations can only get richer by becoming greener and only earn more money by using fewer resources and reusing more. Private capital investment is now leading globally in promoting technological innovation and resource efficiency that will accelerate environmentally and socially sustainable industrial growth and economic development throughout the world.”

click thru for the interactive Scoreboard

[Dr. Hazel Henderson, futurist/author/President, Ethical Markets Media and Vice-Chair, Climate Prosperity Alliance:] “Ethical Markets Media’s mission is reforming markets and growing the green economy globally. Our Global Climate Prosperity Scoreboard® will be updated regularly to show progress toward the ecologically sustainable economies that are vital to our common future. Societies are transitioning from the 300-year old, polluting, fossil-fueled Industrial Era to the advanced technologies of the information-rich Solar Age.”

click to enlarge

"The Climate Prosperity Alliance, a volunteer, global network of financiers, businesses, economic development authorities, scientists and NGOs is based on earth systems science, showing the widespread evidence of destruction caused by the now-obsolete technologies of the combustion-based Industrial Revolution and its extraction and exploitation of the Earth’s capital: oil, coal, gas, minerals, forests, water, land and biodiversity. Human societies are now gradually re-industrializing our economies using the Earth’s income – the renewable energies of sun, wind, ocean/hydro, geothermal and non-agricultural biomass – based on human capital: new knowledge of planetary processes and ecosystems, designing our economies with Nature."

"The Climate Prosperity Alliance uses the Climate Solutions 2 computer model of Australia’s Climate Risk Pty., showing how $1 trillion invested every year for the next 10 years can assure the global transition to sustainable prosperity and job growth. This $10 trillion is less than the bailouts of failed banks in the USA and Europe and less than 10% of the world’s pension and institutional funds of $120 trillion. Institutional fund managers can shift 10% of their assets away from hedge funds, risky derivatives and commodity speculation to real investments in a greener global economy, thereby assuring their beneficiaries a healthier future…"


THE DANGER OF EMISSIONS
EPA Declares Greenhouse Gases a Danger; Controversial Formal Label Opens Door to New Emissions Regulations for Power Plants, Refiners, Smelters and Others
Ian Talley, December 7, 2009 (Wall Street Journal)

"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as expected…declared greenhouse gases a danger to public health, a decision that could soon lead to new emissions regulations for businesses across the economy.

"The "endangerment finding" announced by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is necessary to move ahead on new emissions standards for cars due out in March 2010. Made under the Clean Air Act, it also opens up large emitters such as power plants, oil refineries, chemical plants and metal smelters to regulations that limit their output of carbon dioxide and other gases…"

click to enlarge

"The controversial decision, proposed by the administration earlier this year, comes as a global climate summit opens in Copenhagen. It gives the administration leverage in its negotiations and puts pressure on Congress to pass a [House-approved, Senate-opposed] bill that cuts greenhouse gases in a more economically efficient way…

"Environmentalists celebrated the announcement…Some lawmakers and groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers warned the decision could bring the entire economy to a halt, not only regulating large emitters within months, but also opening other mobile sources and smaller emitters to regulation…"

click to enlarge

"Without any cost analyses of new greenhouse-gas regulations, it is difficult to estimate what the actual impact could be on the economy. Dan Riedinger, a spokesman for the utility industry group Edison Electric Institute, pointed to cost predictions for federal legislation as a guide to the cost. Estimates for legislation vary between $100 a year to $1,000 a year extra for families, and such legislation is specially designed to moderate costs…[T]he EPA strongly challenges dire economic assertions.

"Ms. Jackson indicated the agency would soon finalize a new "tailoring rule" that will set a greenhouse-gas-emissions threshold for regulators at 25,000 tons a year…designed to target the largest emitters…The EPA says that would mean around 13,600 coal-burning power stations, crude refineries, metal smelters and other industrial facilities would come under existing regulations…[and] companies would be required to apply for permits that include the "best available technology." The EPA is seen finalizing what is considered the best available technology in 2011…"